Quote:
Originally Posted by cral12
I concur, SS. One of the more impressive players at camp.
|
He's 23 years old and was competing against a group composed of many 18, 19, and 20 year olds. It's a lot easier to look impressive when you're being measured against folk mostly younger and less experienced then you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah blah
It seems like you just don't like the signing based on the stats
|
Not just the raw stats it's the flatness of the developmental curve, if he'd shown an improvement in them over the three year in the NCAA I'd see more of a capacity for upside but he's essentually just tread water, that's better then sinking but hardly encouraging.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah blah
but we got a decent asset for free.
|
No, we got a an asset of unknown possibly dubious value in exchange for a reserve list slot. I'll grant that's "cheap" but it's not free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolven
How much space do you realistically think the Flames are going to need to take on contracts? If the previous number was accurate, the Flames are at 46 contracts and can let two of them slide. We need to sign Brodie and Bancks and will be hovering between 46-48 contracts depending on whether or not Monahan and Sieloff play more than 9 games this season.
That leaves us with likely 3 contract spots to make moves with.
|
Well, to be safe I'd basically assume that I take back 1 contract per trade (cap or reserve list reasons + young players/prospects) and then assume that you'll sign and play all your senior college guys + gaudreau and hopefully at least one of the better guys from the upcoming class. Not a lot of wiggle room left there.